2k – Affirmations & Denials (2 of 3)

This is the second of three of Dr. Darryl Hart’s affirmations and denials on the 2K topic. Remember, please read the other two (theological, ethics) before posting comments. Thanks.

(Reed DePace)

Affirmations about Vocation

1) Affirmation: the church is called to gather and perfect saints through word, sacrament and discipline.
Denial: the church is not called to meddle in civil affairs.

2) Affirmation: the Christian family is called to nurture and oversee children in both religious and secular matters.
Denial: Christian families will not all look the same but have liberty to rear children according to Scripture and the light of nature.
Denial: non-Christian families do not rear children in godliness or holiness but still have legitimate responsibility for rearing their children.

3) Affirmation: the state is called to punish wickedness, reward goodness, and promote peace and order.
Denial: the state does not hold the keys of the kingdom.

4) Affirmation: A Christian is called to use his talents and gifts to serve God and assist his neighbor.
Denial: some Christians are not called to engage in civil affairs.
Denial: the responsibilities attending one Christian’s vocation may not be the standard for other Christians.

DGH

About these ads

9 Comments

  1. Vern Crisler said,

    February 28, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    It’s amazing how DGH’s views are so similar to James Jordan’s sacral retreat ecclesiology.

  2. Roger du Barry said,

    March 1, 2011 at 1:51 am

    I am truly sad to see this posted.

  3. Vern Crisler said,

    March 1, 2011 at 8:07 am

    How does it differ Roger?

  4. Roger du Barry said,

    March 1, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    DGH’s views are the opposite of James Jordan’s. JJ believes in Christendom, which is anathema to DGH.

  5. Benjamin P. Glaser said,

    March 1, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    JJ does not believe in Christendom. Has not for a long time.

  6. Joshua W.D. Smith said,

    March 2, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    So, thought experiment:

    Our mayor, during the last campaign, lied about having a sexual relationship with an intern (i.e., he denied it). The lie was uncovered after he was elected, and the attempt to recall him was unsuccessful. What if he had been a member of a confessional congregation? The session would have to discipline him for his lie, and if he repented, what should the session’s counsel be with regard to his mayoral position? Repentance is clearly within the rights of the church. If one repents, can one keep the gains obtained by that sin? So, by disciplining him for that sin, isn’t the church meddling in the social order?

  7. Joshua W.D. Smith said,

    March 2, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    And of course Aff. 3 begs the question: what is wickedness? What is goodness? One can’t simply read that off of nature, since there isn’t one consistent or always coherent answer in the ius gentium.

  8. Tom Albrecht said,

    March 3, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    “Denial: the church is not called to meddle in civil affairs.”

    Meddle? Is that a technical term? Does it mean the Church should have zero involvement in civil affairs, say, refusing to withhold taxes for employees, or refusing to track charitable contributions per IRS regulations?

    Is this a one way or two way street?

  9. Richard Tallach said,

    March 8, 2011 at 9:08 am

    There aren’t Two Kingdoms.

    The whole Earth is Christ’s, and Satan and his minions are squatters. Satan’s human minions are to be dealt with by evangelism (New Covenant Holy War) not civil persecution.

    There are two spheres, the Ecclesiastical and the Civil with a societal sphere somewhere in between.

    The Church is the Israel of God, not Great Britain, the USA or their respective states. Christ embodies the fulfillment of the Old Covenant Theocracy, ruling from Heaven over the spheres of Church and State.

    Theonomy is wrongheaded partly because it applies what was carried out by the congregation of Israel under the authority of the elders simplistically to the civil sphere in the New Covenant period. The Old Covenant penalties were partly typical of God’s wrath in that the person being executed was without an animal sacrifice, and was excommunicated from the promised Land which was a type of God’s blessing.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 345 other followers

%d bloggers like this: